Support NeoGAF

[LordKano]

Why didn't Nintendo make the dock a boost box?

So many missed opportunities with Switch.



Jack of all trades, master of none.

That's not a missed opportunity, that's a choice. It would have been a totally different machine with a more powerful dock.

 

[RichiRamjag]

Every time we hear reports of this kind, with the Switch already struggling with games like this, really makes me wish Nintendo had spent the money they used on HD rumble, IR sensors and the like on beefing up those specs instead.

They'll just tap their magic wand and it'll happen I'm sure.

 

[R00bot]

So technically, Zelda Breath of the Wild is *sometimes* running sub-HD (below native 720p).

That's something all by itself.

Only on the Wii U and on the Switch in portable mode.

 

[GhostTrick]

That's not how it works. Switch could hardly be more powerful at that price and with that core hardware.

Yes, it could. It's all about clockspeed and ram configuration. If ram is indeed a bottleneck, then it could likely be 25GB/s as speculated, when it could've been 50GB/s with a 128bit bus instead of 64. It could've hit 1080p with a higher GPU clockspeed docked, like 1Ghz instead of the 768mhz rumoured in dock.
As for the CPU, we have no information on that. If A57 is indeed confirmed, it could've been easily twice faster CPU wise if they go for A72.

 

[AmyS]

Nintendo: Where are the Supplemental Computing Devices that are meant to physically (or wirelessly) connect with the Switch / dock?

Needs more Boost Power!

 

[franklyshankly]

I wonder what this means for future titles. Is MK8 going to be static 1080p or will they just make all games use dynamic res now?

 

[Waveset]

Makes no difference to me as I'm loving the game but it's amazing that Nintendo are still struggling to hit HD resolution.

 

[Donnie]

You're assuming that the bandwidth usage is maxed out in the handheld mode which is most likely not the case. Especially considering our old discussion about how the power draw increases dramatically with the used bandwidth.

Why would I be assuming that?, think you've miss understood my post. I'm saying its a faulty argument to assume that a 56% increase in resolution (handheld to docked resolution increase) can not possibly be sustained by a 20% increase in main memory bandwidth (handheld to docked bandwidth increase)..

It could possibly be a issue, but its worth noting that it isn't necessarily a issue.

 

[Csr]

I see many people didn't read that the 90% number is for each axis so it is 81% in total.
edit: ment to say 81% not 70%

 

[KingSnake]

What's interesting is that the dynamic resolution is so well implemented that very few people noticed. Too bad that they couldn't fix the framerate more in the docked mode.

 

[z0m3le]

Oh, I see what you mean now. Gotcha.

Yeah it's a fairly massive jump, expected in the specs we see of 4 to 5 times Wii U (when docked) but it's the only game so far to suggest this.

However this developer would know how to peak performance from both machines, so it's also always been the most likely game to show a true performance difference between these devices.

 

[Charamiwa]

I think we should wait for the next big first party game, one specifically designed for this machine, before jumping to comclusion about what the Switch can and can't do. I'd even say wait for Mario Odyssey, but Arms or Splatoon should be interesting too.

 

[BLAUcopter]

Irrespective of the dynamic scaling, the game looks amazing on the handheld. Given the shear size of the open world its amazing it runs as good as it does.

 

[acm2000]

hope DF are ready for a DDoSing

 

[jon bones]

Nintendo: Where are the Supplemental Computing Devices that are meant to physically (or wirelessly) connect with the Switch / dock?

Why didn't Nintendo make the dock a boost box?

because it was important to Nintendo that the handheld form wasn't gimped.

 

[GhostTrick]

What's interesting is that the dynamic resolution is so well implemented that very few people noticed. Too bad that they couldn't fix the framerate more in the docked mode.

I don't think it's because it's well implemented and more like because it doesn't drop too much for one, and most importantly: It's already running at sub 1080p resolution. It's easier to spot a drop in resolution when you go from native to non native rather than non native to lower.

 

[z0m3le]

Yes, it could. It's all about clockspeed and ram configuration. If ram is indeed a bottleneck, then it could likely be 25GB/s as speculated, when it could've been 50GB/s with a 128bit bus instead of 64. It could've hit 1080p with a higher GPU clockspeed docked, like 1Ghz instead of the 768mhz rumoured in dock.
As for the CPU, we have no information on that. If A57 is indeed confirmed, it could've been easily twice faster CPU wise if they go for A72.

Exactly as you say. This difference wouldn't have changed the price much, if at all, battery consumption would have likely stayed the same.

This is what I believe they should have done, but the device is still a really fair spec for the price, I think Pixel C cost twice as much for instance with the same chip (at higher clock speeds) but this has custom software to run games at a higher fidelity thanks to not being on an Android OS.

 

[KingSnake]

I don't think it's because it's well implemented and more like because it doesn't drop too much for one, and most importantly: It's already running at sub 1080p resolution. It's easier to spot a drop in resolution when you go from native to non native rather than non native to lower.

I was more thinking about the handheld mode. Where it goes sub-native. I guess the size of the screen plays a part there.

 

[RoadHazard]

Must be a bottleneck somewhere in this hardware.

Memory bandwidth.

We're not gonna be seeing many native 1080p titles on this thing, beyond visually simple games (and yes, MK is visually simple, as great as it looks).

 

[Always-honest]

Brad Shoemaker of Giant Bomb brought it up in a recent video. He didn't say anything concrete but he noticed a very poor resolution lamp post and was wondering if they used dynamic resolution scaling.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hrm-rPSCIBw
Sorry, first thing that came to mind ;P

I noticed and posted about it, but no one else noticed I guess.

Well, pretty good that you noticed.

Haven't played it yet myself...

 

[Regginator]

Is this scaling also present on the Wii U? Because sometimes it feels like, during demanding scenes, the resolution feels less crisp than usual. Maybe it's just between my ears.


edit: replied too quickly, the answer is yes:

yes, you've guessed it - the same scaling technology is also deployed on the last-gen version of Zelda as well. We used Kakariko Village here as an established testing point where performance is poor in order to confirm this. Wii U matches Switch's portable profile, offering up a 1152x648 resolution in these areas.

 

[GhostTrick]

I was more thinking about the handheld mode. Where it goes sub-native. I guess the size of the screen plays a part there.

It does indeed. Then again, the drop isn't that big on such a screen size. I'd argue down to 540p looks decent on 720p.

Exactly as you say. This difference wouldn't have changed the price much, if at all, battery consumption would have likely stayed the same.

This is what I believe they should have done, but the device is still a really fair spec for the price, I think Pixel C cost twice as much for instance with the same chip (at higher clock speeds) but this has custom software to run games at a higher fidelity thanks to not being on an Android OS.

Then again, it's all speculation on my part, based on rumours. Maybe they indeed did the best they could. As for Pixel C price, I dont know if the price is that comparable considering the SoC isn't the biggest factor in term of price.

 

[ElTorro]

Is this scaling also present on the Wii U? Because sometimes it feels like, during demanding scenes, the resolution feels less crisp than usual. Maybe it's just between my ears.

Yes.

 

[z0m3le]

Memory bandwidth.

We're not gonna be seeing many native 1080p titles on this thing, beyond visually simple games (and yes, MK is visually simple, as great as it looks).

Hard to take this data and apply it to native games, however ARMS seems to be 900p? so could be the case, though we will know more after the first wave of software is released and we can get a die shot to see if there is any on die memory cache for video buffer.

It does indeed. Then again, the drop isn't that big on such a screen size. I'd argue down to 540p looks decent on 720p.

Then again, it's all speculation on my part, based on rumours. Maybe they indeed did the best they could. As for Pixel C price, I dont know if the price is that comparable considering the SoC isn't the biggest factor in term of price.

Well all they really needed to do was create a great base for future iterations and I think they nailed it with A57 and ~200gflops modern nvidia gflops.

 

[AndyMoogle]

Yes, it could. It's all about clockspeed and ram configuration. If ram is indeed a bottleneck, then it could likely be 25GB/s as speculated, when it could've been 50GB/s with a 128bit bus instead of 64. It could've hit 1080p with a higher GPU clockspeed docked, like 1Ghz instead of the 768mhz rumoured in dock.
As for the CPU, we have no information on that. If A57 is indeed confirmed, it could've been easily twice faster CPU wise if they go for A72.

You have to consider heat with that increase in GPU speed.

 

[NSESN]

Maybe Nintendo could patch the game to use this more to improve the FR?

 

[King of Cups]

Considering this is a launch game originally built for older hardware and it STILL has performance issues despite these concessions, I'm pretty disappointed with Nintendo's choices for speccing out the Switch.

It would be one thing if this was just their handheld ... but it's not.

So four more years of performance issues, especially for multiplats. This on top of how gimped joycons are if portable mode is your main draw.

Based on their GDC talk, it sounds like they did very little optimization for the Switch to keep some performance parity with the Wii U version. This both sounds like something Nintendo would do and is about what I expected for this as a launch title. For a game like BotW, I imagine their level of optimization was ironing out bugs and trying not to break anything in the process.

If that is the case, these will likely be isolated incidents until we get our first Switch-only games (ARMS, Mario). I believe lots of people assume the worst because "well, it's a handheld," but it's fair to say that we don't actually know what it's capable of yet. Familiarity and focus will ultimately provide an better level of performance.

 

[GhostTrick]

You have to consider heat with that increase in GPU speed.

Which shouldn't be a problem while docked. I mean, it's a dock they're selling for 90 bucks. If they weren't so greedy, maybe they could've come up with a decent cooling solution with the dock instead of a plastic piece which does nothing that a USB C hub would do. It's true that the GPU speed would bring the heat further up, but I doubt it's something that would've been unsustainable with proper cooling, especially considering the device isnt fanless.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

I never notice this on games on Xbox and PS4 and I haven't noticed it on Zelda WiiU.

 

[Zombegoast]

I noticed it last night when I went back to the great plateau. But I haven't noticed it since. This port is weird.

 

[AndyMoogle]

Which shouldn't be a problem while docked. I mean, it's a dock they're selling for 90 bucks. If they weren't so greedy, maybe they could've come up with a decent cooling solution with the dock instead of a plastic piece which does nothing that a USB C hub would do. It's true that the GPU speed would bring the heat further up, but I doubt it's something that would've been unsustainable with proper cooling, especially considering the device isnt fanless.

We've been through this in multiple threads. USB-C products are really expensive. $90 also includes a USB-C charger and a HDMI cable.

$60 for the dock is in line with other similar products out there.

 

[Stilton Disco]

That's not how it works. Switch could hardly be more powerful at that price and with that core hardware.

They'll just tap their magic wand and it'll happen I'm sure.

I'm not saying they could have magically made a PS4Pro level system by ditching such gimmicks, but newer, more powerful/efficient versions of those chips do exist, extra ram or better cooling to allow for upclocking for examples could all have had the money spent on them instead, and any of those things would have made the Switch run games better.

The Switch is not cutting edge tech by any stretch of the imagination. More up to date than Nintendo usually go for, sure, but there's plenty of ways the system could have been improved that they chose not to go for, instead using the budget for gimmicks that, given all past precedents, won't be used by the vast majority of games and wouldn't effect sales if they'd never been included in the first place.

 

[JonnyDBrit]

Exactly as you say. This difference wouldn't have changed the price much, if at all, battery consumption would have likely stayed the same.

This is what I believe they should have done, but the device is still a really fair spec for the price, I think Pixel C cost twice as much for instance with the same chip (at higher clock speeds) but this has custom software to run games at a higher fidelity thanks to not being on an Android OS.

It does indeed. Then again, the drop isn't that big on such a screen size. I'd argue down to 540p looks decent on 720p.

Then again, it's all speculation on my part, based on rumours. Maybe they indeed did the best they could. As for Pixel C price, I dont know if the price is that comparable considering the SoC isn't the biggest factor in term of price.

I suspect the most difficult aspect in all this was time. The Wii U just didn't last as long as Nintendo had hoped or wanted it to, and I wouldn't be surprised if more than once during development they ran up against an issue of where the parts they wanted would be either too expensive or just not available in time, even accounting for the development and inclusion of HD Rumble.

 

[Liabe Brave]

yes but it runs a 1920x1080p image and dynamic scales to 900p, while Wii U uses a 640x720p image and dynamically scales that....

Actually, there is some evidence to suggest that FAST RMX on Switch is also using temporal upscaling, and is not native 1920x1080. Not certain by any means, but suggestive.

 

[DrROBschiz]

Yeah Ive played a bunch in both modes and I would say that just being shy of great performance is its largest flaw

Its very noticeable but you forgive it because the game just sucks you in

I wouldnt mind if Nintendo finds a way to squeeze more power/efficiency out of the system with future firmware updates and optimization patches

I feel like the game SHOULD run better than it currently does with this hardware

 

[Yarbskoo]

I kinda wish they'd drop it more in docked mode to avoid those drops to 20 fps.

 

[LordKano]

Actually, there is some evidence to suggest that FAST RMX on Switch is also using temporal upscaling, and is not native 1920x1080. Not certain by any means, but suggestive.

I thought DF said they got rid of temporal upscaling ?

 

[Martin5000]

I noticed it while playing but I thought I'm just stupid and imagine that it looked sometimes worse in handheld mode!

Glad I wasn't imagine it

 

[GhostTrick]

We've been through this in multiple threads. USB-C products are really expensive. $90 also includes a USB-C charger and a HDMI cable.

$60 for the dock is in line with other similar products out there.

60 dollars docks are usually premium ones. Which means not USB 3.0, 2 USB 2.0 and a HDMI port, but usually more USB 3.0 ports, sd card reader and even ethernet port.

 

[magawolaz]

hope DF are ready for a DDoSing

I chuckled

 

[jett]

I'm not surprised. Some of Nintendo's old screenshots for the Wii U had a subHD-like quality to them.

 

[plagiarize]

I thought DF said they got rid of temporal upscaling ?

They went further than that, and said the developers said as much.

 

[IronicSonic]

Now I get why the blurry IQ at the beginning of the game.

 

[adamsapple]

hope DF are ready for a DDoSing

 

[sixteen-bit]

Interesting findings. I did notice the image was kinda soft on WiiU even for a 720p game.

 

[Y2Kev]

I feel like you can notice this weird shimmering artifact on some of the special effects. Like they are low resolution or something. I guess that's made worse by that weird pink sheen crap on Ganon's...uh...poo aura.

 

[gconsole]

It is very obvious to me. Especially one in Kakariko village near the statue. As handheld mode use native resolution which match the screen it becomes obviously blurry when the resolution change.

 

[b00_thegh0st]

Ok. Does that mean the firmware issue with dynamic downscaling brought up in their coverage of Fast RMX impacts Zelda too? I still can't understand why their pre-release Switch hands-on was running almost perfectly and we end up with these drops in the final product.

 

[orioto]

I kinda noticed it somewhat at the beginning, in portable mode, but wasn't sure if it was post-processing or something else. Not that the resolution change is huge but when it's not a native rez anymore there is upscale and the iq is not the same anymore obviously.

Also i asked in the OT but nobody never answer me. WHY THE FUCK is Link completly blurry in the menu!?

 

[z0m3le]

Actually, there is some evidence to suggest that FAST RMX on Switch is also using temporal upscaling, and is not native 1920x1080. Not certain by any means, but suggestive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDAkVPTn8cc&t=2s

According to this, it's full 1080p with dynamic resolution enabled at times.